A BRIEF REVIEW OF LOBBYING REGIMES IN THE EU

In view of the downside risks of lobbying and the impressive mobilisation of private resources, public pressure is rising worldwide to put lobbying regulations on the political agenda. Transparency, integrity and fairness in the decision-making process are crucial to safeguard the public interest and promote a level playing field for businesses. However, regulating lobbying has proven difficult for decision makers due to its complexity and sensitive nature and many EU countries rely on self-regulation of lobbyists. Contrary to popular opinion, the majority of surveyed lobbyists (OECD, 2009) support mandatory disclosure of information.

Here below is a brief review of the lobbying regimes that have been established in several EU member states (in alphabetical order)

Austria: In 2012, Austria adopted a strong form of lobbying regulation, known as the ‘Lobbying and Advocacy Transparency Act . The Austrian National Council approved legislation to impose a mandatory lobbyist registry. All professional lobbyists who receive significant compensation to influence legislation and administrative policies, as well as special interest groups employing lobbyists are required to file with the lobbying Register (Register of Interest Representation (IRV)). Disclosure reports must include information on the identities of the lobbyists, clients, issues lobbied, the value of lobbying contracts and initial lobbying contacts with government officials. Most of the IRV data is published on the Internet for easy access by the public. Registrants must also pledge to abide by a Code of Conduct established as part of the lobbying law, violations of which may result in a suspension of lobbying activities and lobbying contracts.

France: The French lobby law bears many of the same weak regulatory characteristics of the regimes of the European countries. The lobbyist registry is voluntary for both the National Assembly and the Senate. Registration entitles the lobbyist to a pass system that grants easy access to the Palais Bourbon (National Assembly) and the Palais du Luxembourg (Senate). Registered lobbyists in France do not disclose their financial activity, though clients are identified. This limited information, however, is not made readily available to the public on the Internet. There is a Code of Conduct applicable to interest representatives in both the Senate and National Assembly.

Germany: Germany first implemented its lobbyist registry in 1951. The registry is voluntary and is not designed as a lobbyist registry per se. Instead, it is primarily a registration system for issuing passes to enter the parliamentary buildings. The registry is only of organizations rather than individuals; it does not include any financial information, disclose who is participating in lobbying on behalf of an entity or specify on what issues the organization lobbies. Germany's lobbying law was originally envisioned as a means to institutionalize the involvement of powerful trade associations and labor unions in governmental policymaking.

Hungary: Hungary set up a voluntary lobbyist registry in 2006. Like many of the other programmes in effect in Europe, the registry entitled registrants to a lobbying license for easy access in the halls of government. It also required registrants to file quarterly reports on their lobbying activities, including the number of lobbying contacts, any gifts given to public officials and the identities of those officials, as well as the legislation or executive policies lobbied. It did not, however, require registrants to identify their clients. The lobbyist reports were made available to the public on the Web page of the Central Office of Justice. Hungarian authorities made some effort to encourage registration but the FIDESZ government quietly repealed Hungary's lobbyist registration system in 2011. The voluntary Hungarian Lobby Law was perceived neither as an effective method of facilitating a partnership between business and government nor as a means of enhancing public confidence in government. Hungary introduced the Government regulation of the integrity management system of state administration bodies and lobbyists  (Magyar Közlöny 30. Szám (2013. február 25.) 50/2013. (II. 25.) Korm. rendelet) in February 2013.

Lithuania: Lithuania began a registry in 2001. Lithuania's registration system only includes contract lobbyists who attempt to influence the legislative branch of government, specifically excluding both in-house lobbyists, who are considered part of a corporation's permanent staff, and non-profit lobbying organizations. Lobbyists in Lithuania submit an annual report of their lobbying activities to the registry. In addition to name, address, phone number and certificate number, a registered lobbyist must also record his or her income from and expenditures for lobbying activities, and the title(s) of legislation influenced by the lobbyist. The reports are published in the Official Gazette of Lithuania.

Netherlands: On 1 July 2012 the Dutch House of Representatives introduced a Lobby Registry along with a pass to the premises (one per organisation). The Registry distinguishes 3 categories of lobbyists: Employees of public affairs and public relations agencies, representatives of civil society organisations and associations and representatives of municipalities and provinces.

Poland: Poland implemented what is described as a mandatory lobbyist registry in 2005. Similar to Lithuania, however, it applies only to contract lobbyists. The registry is public information, accessible through the Public Information Bulletin of the Minister of Interior and Administration. Disclosure records include the identities of lobbyists, as well as their employers and issues lobbied. One unique feature of the Polish system is that government officials are required to maintain records of lobbying contacts, which are then published annually.

Slovenia : Slovenia's ‘Integrity and Prevention of Corruption Act (ZIntPK)’ is an ambitious program boldly stating in the preamble that it is ‘aimed at strengthening integrity and transparency, as well as preventing corruption and avoiding and combating conflicts of interest’. The law creates a special Commission for the Prevention of Corruption charged with implementing and enforcing the law. It applies to the legislative and executive branches of the national government, as well as local governmental bodies. Registration is mandatory for all individuals working in a private capacity to influence legislation or public policy and requires information on the names and addresses of lobbyists, their clients or businesses represented, compensation received, as well as any campaign contributions made to political parties, specific issues lobbied and the offices contacted. Data in the registry is public information. Perhaps the most unique aspect of the lobbying law in Slovenia is its emphasis on requiring government officials to report lobbying contacts, which are then posted on the Commission's Web page. During the first year of implementation of the law, the Commission has provided the number of lobbying contacts made with each government office and ministry on the Internet, but has also publicly expressed some frustration that government officials may not be reporting all their lobbying contacts. In an effort to encourage compliance, the Commission reports ‘0’ contacts by each office that has not reported any contacts. Slovenia's approach to lobbying regulation will be an interesting and informative experiment.

United Kingdom: In 2009 a select committee of the UK House of Commons produced a study that strongly recommended adoption of a mandatory system of lobbyist registration and disclosure. The three major professional lobbying associations in the United Kingdom – the Chartered Institute of Public Relations, the Association of Professional Political Consultants and the Public Relations Consultants Association (PRCA) – made a concerted effort to self-regulate the industry as an alternative to mandatory regulation. The professional associations set up the UK Public Affairs Council in which lobbyists are encouraged to register and abide by a lobbyist code of ethics. The PRCA resigned from the UKPAC in December 2011, citing concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the UKPAC's register of individual lobbyists.

Some of the associations post their lobbyist registrations online. However, like many of the efforts of self-regulation throughout Europe, the UK self-regulation effort has been crippled by several inherent flaws. First, and most importantly, the registration requirement is only imposed on those who wish to join the professional associations. Those who choose to remain outside the UK Public Affairs Council or the three professional associations avoid the registration and disclosure requirements. Lawyers, law firms, think tanks and others who are often heavily involved in affecting public policy feel no compulsion to register as lobbyists – and they generally do not register. This lack of participation in the voluntary association-run registry deprives the public of a full picture of the influence-peddling business and, of concern to the lobbying profession itself, applies the lobbyist regulations unequally, with those who do not register escaping restrictions on their lobbying conduct. Second, enforcement for violations of the associations’ code of ethics tends to be minimal at best. Where self-regulation prevails, including in the United Kingdom, enforcement actions are limited to reprimands or expulsion from the association (if they occur at all). As a result, efforts at self-regulation, however noble, tend to fall short of expectations, especially in nations where lobbyist corruption is perceived as a major problem. The self-regulation effort in the United Kingdom appears to be failing, as one of the three associations recently joined in the calls for government regulation.